USCIRF Launches New Database of Religious Persecution Victims

On Monday at an International Religious Freedom Roundtable in Washington, D.C., the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom announced that it has launched the Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) Victims List. The database lists those who have been victims of religious persecution in countries that USCIRF has recommended be designated "Countries of Particular Concern" under the International Religious Freedom Act.

EEOC Sues Over Denial of Religious Accommodation To Messianic Jewish Employee

The EEOC yesterday announced the filing of a lawsuit against Center One, LLC, a call center company:

According to the EEOC's lawsuit ..., a call center employee at Center One's Beaver Falls, Pa., location, who is an adherent of Messianic Judaism, sought a reasonable accommodation of his religious beliefs and practice that he abstain from work on days of religious observance.... Center One imposed disciplinary points against the Messianic Jewish employee for his absences in observance of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. Center One required that the employee provide a certification from a religious leader or religious organization "on letterhead" as a precondition of granting him time off as a reasonable accommodation and imposed disciplinary points against the Messianic Jewish employee for his absences in observance of those religious holidays...

EEOC Suit Over Insults To Muslim Employees Settled

The EEOC announced  that a consent decree was signed on Tuesday settling a suit against Haliburton Energy Services. The suit charged that two Muslim workers were subjected to taunts and name calling over their religion and national origin. One was fired for complaining about his treatment.  In the consent decree, the company agreed to pay $275,000 in damages. The decree also enjoined future violations and requires training of human resource and managerial employees. (See prior related posting.)

Court Defers To Decisions of Parent Body In Dispute With Break-Away Presbyterian Congregation

In Presbytery of Seattle v. Schulz, (WA App., Oct. 7, 2019), a Washington state appellate court upheld a trial court's deference to decisions of the Administrative Commission set up by the Presbyterian Church USA's representative in connection with disputes regarding a break-away congregation.  Finding that the Presbyterian church is a hierarchical church, the court concluded that the trial court correctly deferred to the decisions of the Administrative Commission that the disaffiliation of the First Presbyterian Church of Seattle was invalid, any interest it had in church property was held in trust for the benefit of Presbyterian Church USA, and the church's severance agreements with its pastors were invalid.  The court rejected the argument by the local church that the national body no longer had ecclesiastical jurisdiction over it once it disaffiliated, so determinations after that date by the Administrative Commission should not binding.

Cert. Denied In Dispute Over Liability of National Church Body For Sex Abuse By Church Elder

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court denied review in Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York v. J.W., (Docket No. 19-40, certiorari denied 10/7/2019). (Order List). In the case, a California state appellate court upheld an award against national church body of over $4 million to a girl who, when she was ten years old, was sexually abused by an elder of the Jehovah's Witness church.  (See prior posting.) The petition for certiorari (full text) raised 1st Amendment issues both as to liability for acts of congregants and production of internal documents. Friendly Atheist blog discusses the case.

US Sanctions Chinese Entities For Human Rights Abuses of Uighurs

In a press release yesterday, he U.S. Department of Commerce announced that it is imposing sanctions on 28 Chinese governmental and commercial organizations because they have been implicated in China's human rights abuses of Uighurs and other Muslim ethnic minorities in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region. Thompson Reuters reports on these developments.

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments In LGBTQ Employment Discrimination Cases

Today the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in three cases involving whether Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act covers employment discrimination against gays, lesbians and transgender individuals.  Two of the cases (consolidated for oral argument) involve whether the ban on discrimination on the "because of sex" covers sexual orientation discrimination.  The cases are Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia (case page on SCOTUSblog) and Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda (case page on SCOTUSblog). Here is the transcript of the full oral argument. The third case is R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (case page on SCOTUSblog). It raises the question of whether Title VII's ban on "sex" discrimination protects transgender individuals from employment discrimination.  Here is the transcript of the full oral argument. CNN reports on the oral arguments.

White House Issues Yom Kippur Greetings

The White House today released a Presidential Message on Yom Kippur, 2019 (full text). The message reads in part:

On this day, as Jews around the world stand in front of the open ark, facing the holy Torah and asking God’s forgiveness, Melania and I pray that He may seal you in the Book of Life for the coming year and grant His people a year of sweetness and plenty.

Yom Kippur begins at sundown tonight.

Cert. Petition Filed In Contraceptive Mandate Exemption Challenge

The Justice Department yesterday filed a petition for certiorari (full text) in Trump v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. In the case, the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court's entry of a nationwide preliminary injunction against enforcement of the Trump Administration's final rules expanding the scope of the exemptions under the Affordable Care Act for employers having religious or moral objections to contraceptive coverage. (See prior posting.) The cert. petition presents the following questions:

1. Whether the agencies had statutory authority under the ACA and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ..., to expand the conscience exemption to the contraceptive-coverage mandate.

2. Whether the agencies’ decision to forgo notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing the interim final rules rendered the final rules—which were issued after notice and comment—invalid under the Administrative Procedure Act....

3. Whether the court of appeals erred in affirming a nationwide preliminary injunction barring implementation of the final rules.

[Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Certiorari Denied In Challenge To "Bible in the Schools" Program

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court denied review in Mercer County Board of Education v. Deal, (Docket No. 18-1487, certiorari denied 10/7/2019).  (Order List.) In the case, the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a West Virginia federal district court and held that a student who had withdrawn from the offending school system (and her parent) had standing to challenge the school system's Bible in the Schools program. It also held that the claim was ripe for adjudication. (See prior posting.) Bluefield Daily Telegraph reports on the Supreme Court's action.

Supreme Court Denies Review Of Discovery Directed To Church

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied certiorari in Presbyterian Church v. Edwards, (Docket No. 18-1441, cert. denied 10/7/2019). In the case the Kentucky Supreme Court allowed discovery to proceed in a defamation suit against the Presbyterian Church to the extent necessary to determine if the church is entitled to ecclesiastical immunity. (See prior posting.) The Supreme Court in June denied a stay in the case.

Annual Red Mass Attended By Three Current Justices and Others

Catholic Standard reports on the annual Red Mass held yesterday at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in Washington, D.C.  The Mass is held each year on the Sunday before the U.S. Supreme Court opens its term. The paper reports:

Archbishop [Wilton D.] Gregory noted, “We pray for all of the members of the judiciary and legal world because yours is the tremendous responsibility of attempting to reflect God’s perfect justice and mercy in interpreting the laws of our nation and for all those who will come before you during this next year.”

Those affected by the administration of justice, he added, include those who may have committed crimes, and “those whose language, culture, race, or religion are not your own, as well as those who are at precarious moment on the spectrum of human life.  None of them are unimportant and all of them approach you for what they hope will be a sign and an expression of God’s truth.”

Four Supreme Court justices attended the Mass: John G. Roberts Jr., Chief Justice of the United States; Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Stephen G. Breyer; and retired Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy.

Also in attendance were U.S. Attorney General William Barr; U.S. Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia; and U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco; along with numerous judges and local attorneys, along with deans, professors and students from area law schools. John Garvey, the president of The Catholic University of America; and John DeGioia, the president of Georgetown University, were also at the Mass.

British Employment Tribunal Rules Against Doctor Who Objects To Policy On Pronouns For Transgender Patients

In Mackereth v. Department for Work and Pensions, (Empl. Trib., Oc. 2, 2019), a British Employment Tribunal held that while a doctor's Christian religious beliefs are protected under the Equality Act, his refusal to refer to transgender patients who he was hired to assess by their preferred pronouns and titles constitutes unlawful discrimination and harassment under the Equality Act. The Tribunal said in part:

We accept that the belief in Genesis 1:27, lack of belief in transgenderism and conscientious objection to transgenderism ... are genuinely held and ... relate to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour and attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance....

Irrespective of our determinations above, ... belief in Genesis 1:27, lack of belief in transgenderism and conscientious objection to transgenderism in our judgment are incompatible with human dignity and conflict with the fundamental rights of others, specifically here, transgender individuals....

... [T]he right to manifest a religion or belief is subject to art. 9(2) [of the European Convention on Human Rights] which includes “the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”....

Law & Religion UK has more on the decision.

European Court Says Conviction For Holocaust Denial Does Not Violate Free Speech Rights

In Pastors v. Germany, (ECHR, Oct. 3, 2019), the European Court of Human Rights in a chamber judgment rejected claims by the chairman of the National Democratic Party of Germany that his criminal conviction for a speech he gave in the Land Parliament of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania violated his free expression rights under Art. 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.  Pastors was convicted of defamation and violating the memory of the dead for language in his speech denying the existence of the Holocaust.  The court said in part:

In the present case, the applicant intentionally stated untruths in order to defame the Jews and the persecution that they had suffered during the Second World War. Reiterating that it has always been sensitive to the historical context of the High Contracting Party concerned when reviewing whether there exists a pressing social need for interference with rights under the Convention and that, in the light of their historical role and experience, States that have experienced the Nazi horrors may be regarded as having a special moral responsibility to distance themselves from the mass atrocities perpetrated by the Nazis ..., the Court therefore considers that the applicant’s impugned statements affected the dignity of the Jews to the point that they justified a criminal-law response. Even though the applicant’s sentence of eight months’ imprisonment, suspended on probation, was not insignificant, the Court considers that the domestic authorities adduced relevant and sufficient reasons and did not overstep their margin of appreciation. The interference was therefore proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued and was thus “necessary in a democratic society”.

... In these circumstances the Court finds that there is no appearance of a violation of Article 10 of the Convention. Accordingly the complaint must be rejected as being manifestly ill-founded in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.

The court also issued a press release summarizing the decision.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Silvia Timofti, Adoption History. From Ancient Societies to Contemporary Societies, (August 20, 2019).
• Jonathan Zasloff, Sanctuary, Civil Disobedience, and Jewish Law, (UCLA School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 19-32 (2019)).
• Marc O. DeGirolami, First Amendment Traditionalism, (Washington University Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Adriaan Knoetze & Shaun Alberto de Freitas, The Protection of Conscientious Objection against Euthanasia in Health Care, (Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, Vol. 22, 2019).
• Rafael Domingo, The Individual in Contemporary Sacred Natural Law, (Forthcoming in Anne Peter and Tom Sparks, The Individual in International Law. History and Theory (2021)).
• Andrew John Hoffman, Our Emerging Cultural Shift: Regaining the Moral Case to Address Climate Change, (Behavioral Scientist, September 30, 2019).
• Richard Schragger & Micah Schwartzman, Establishment Clause Inversion in the Bladensburg Cross Case, (ACS Supreme Court Review 2018-2019).
• Whittney Barth, et. al., Researching Hate: Challenges to Tracking Hate Crimes & Practices for Collecting Better Data, (September 18, 2019).
• Roger Colinvaux & Ray D. Madoff, Charitable Tax Reform For the 21st Century, (164 Tax Notes 1867 (2019)).

From SSRN (Islamic Law):

• Zaizul Ab Rahman, et. al., Implementing the Element of Islamic Perspective View in Mental Health Problems, (International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology 10(3), 2019, pp. 1182-1191).
• Zaizul Ab Rahman, et. al., Element of Religiosity Practices among Teens in Islamic Perspective, (International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 10(3), 2019, pp. 1244-1251).
• Raditya Sukmana, Khoirul Zadid Taqwa & Tika Widiastuti, Islamic Financial Intermediation of Indonesian Economic Growth in 2003: Q1-2015: Q4, (International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 10(3), 2019, pp. 1320-1333).
• Galym Zhussipbek & Zhanar Nagayeva, Epistemological Reform and Embracement of Human Rights. What Can be Inferred from Islamic Rationalistic Maturidite Theology?, (Open Theology 2019; 5: 347–365).

Judicial Ethics Complaint Filed Over Judge's Gift of Bible To Convicted Murder Defendant

On Oct. 3, the Freedom From Religion Foundation filed a complaint with the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct (full text) asking it to investigate the actions of state trial judge Tammy Kemp at the widely covered murder trial of Former Dallas Police Officer Amber Guyger.  The complaint states in part:

We write to raise your awareness of Judge Kemp’s actions at the close of the trial — during which she gifted a Christian bible, instructing the convicted criminal on how to read the bible and which passages to pay attention to, and witnessing to that convicted murderer. These proselytizing actions overstepped judicial authority, were inappropriate and were unconstitutional....

We understand that it was an emotional moment, particularly when the victim’s brother, Brandt Jean, publicly forgave and hugged Guyger. It is perfectly acceptable for private citizens to express their religious beliefs in court, but the rules are different for those acting in a governmental role. We, too, believe our criminal justice system needs more compassion from judges and prosecutors. But here, compassion crossed the line into coercion. And there can be few relationships more coercive than a sentencing judge in a criminal trial and a citizen accused and convicted of a crime.

FFRF issued a press release announcing the filing of the complaint.

Trial Judge's Alleged Anti-Jewish Bias Leads To Stay of Execution

In Ex parte Halprin, (TX Ct. Crim. App., Oct. 4, 2019), the Texas' Court of Criminal Appeals stayed the execution of a Jewish inmate who claims that his trial judge was biased against him. Petitioner claims that the judge regularly used racist language and antisemitic slurs. Plaintiff's Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus contends:

The ... claim presents newly uncovered evidence that trial judge Vickers Cunningham referred to Mr. Halprin as a “goddamn kike” and “fuckin’ Jew,” and to his Latino co-defendants as “wetbacks,” when the judge bragged about his role in convicting and sentencing to death the Jewish and Latino members of the Texas 7. The evidence of Judge Cunningham’s bias comes primarily from first-hand accounts of disinterested witnesses to his prejudiced statements... and Judge Cunningham’s lifelong association with racist and anti-Semitic role models....

The court remanded the case for determination if petitioner's due process and free exercise rights were violated. Courthouse News Service reports on the decision.

Tampa Conversion Therapy Ban Invalidated On Preemption Grounds

In Vazzo v. City of Tampa, (MD FL, Oct. 4, 2019), a Florida federal district court invalidated a Tampa city ordinance barring licensed psychotherapists and counselors from practicing sexual orientation change efforts on minors. The court avoided the significant constitutional issues posed by the conversion therapy ban, and instead held:

The City Ordinance is preempted by the comprehensive Florida regulatory scheme for healthcare regulation and discipline. Accordingly, the Court strikes the Ordinance under the implied preemption doctrine and grants the Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment.

(See prior related posting.) CBS12 reports on the decision.

Court Refuses To Enforce Jewish Marriage Contract Provision

In Tilsen v. Benson, 2019 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2475 (CT Super. Ct., Sept. 11, 2019), a Connecticut trial court opinion that has just become available on LEXIS, the court rejected plaintiff's argument that it could constitutionally apply neutral principles of law to enforce a provision in a ketubah (Jewish marriage contract) as if it were a pre-nuptial agreement. According to the court, the ketubah provided that any divorce would be "according to Torah law."  The husband argued that this means there should be a 50/50 division of property with no obligation for continuing alimony payments. In denying plaintiff's motion to enforce the ketubah, the court said in part:

To educate the court about the parties' chosen law, the plaintiff submitted the affidavit of a rabbi ... describing his understanding of Torah law as it pertains to alimony and property division. The defendant also submitted the affidavit of a rabbi. However, the defendant's rabbinical expert disagrees with the plaintiff's rabbinical expert.

It is clear, then, that enforcement of the "Torah law" provision in the Ketubah would require the court to choose between competing interpretations of Jewish law. But resolving such a dispute is precisely what the neutral principles approach forbids a court to do. The first amendment does not permit courts to resolve disputes over the meaning and interpretation of the Torah-or the Koran, the New Testament or any other religious text....

EEOC Sues Over Firing of Jehovah's Witness Employee

The EEOC announced this week that it has filed suit in a New York federal district court against Pedidatrics 2000 for religious discrimination in firing a Jehovah's Witness employee.  When the employee requested not to attend a December holiday party because it would violate her religious practices, she was fired by the health care company's owner who texted her: "[W]e can't tolerate religious privileges from anyone." JD Supra reports on the lawsuit.